A. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a frame assembly for supporting a camera, particularly a portable video or film camera. More particularly, the present invention relates to a frame for stably supporting a portable video camera, or other camera on the shoulders of a user to allow the steady filming, taping or still photography of objects which may be moving rapidly and unpredictably. The frame assembly of the present invention is particularly suited for the recording of aircraft, sporting events, and wildlife.
B. Description of the Related Art
It has heretofore been difficult to stabilize small, portable video and motion picture cameras. Certain uses of these cameras have been particularly difficult such as the recording or filming of moving objects encountered when viewing sporting events, when recording athletes, race cars or aircraft, or when filming or taping wildlife.
Many modern video cameras, for example, have built in electronic or optical stabilizers. These stabilizers are helpful when the camera is held relatively still, to capture, for example, a distant landscape. However, when camera movement is made that exceeds the ability of the built in stabilizer to correct, the result is a jumping effect as the stabilizer attempts to reestablish a reference. This problem is seen particularly often when trying to follow fast, unpredictable objects such as aircraft. Even though the jumping effect is less pronounced when using optical stabilizers as compared to electronic stabilizers, neither stabilizer provides sufficient stability without major additional physical stabilization.
Many products are currently marketed to provide external stabilization for video camera operators. The most common devices are tripods. Tripods offer stability, but even with high cost fluid heads, there are limits to how fast a camera can be panned without roughness in the motion. One tripod head is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 1,971,486. It is particularly difficult, using tripods, to continuously follow an aircraft changing elevation and bearing. Known tripods do not have the flexibility to allow the rapid changes in elevation and bearing necessary, and they do not have the freedom of motion to allow for deflection necessary to track aircraft at high elevations. The legs of the tripod are also an impediment to the freedom of motion of the camera operator.
Gyro stabilized platforms are available, but these are extremely expensive, and are usually confined to professional applications. The are heavy, expensive and require considerable power, and are thus inappropriate for hobby video or film work.
One device, presently sold by Glidecam Industries of Plymouth, Mass., uses a system of weights and balances to stabilize a handheld video camera. However, use of this device requires the suspension of a considerable amount of weight in front of the camera operator, and thus causes significant fatigue in the operator. In addition, the camera operator cannot use the camera's view finder, but must look directly at the object. This method of stabilization severely limits the option to move the camera to track moving objects. Recent variations of this product provide a post that nests in a pocket on the camera operator's belt. This belt assembly could support a considerable amount of weight, and might otherwise be useful, but still does not provide sufficient stability for all uses and requires that the operator's hands be on the camera at all times.
Another device, called a Camcorder Shoulder Rest, is sold by Video Innovators, of Frisco, Colo. This device is a hand-held mounting bar on which a camera is mounted. At the end of the device in front of the camera operator is a handle pointing downward, which the camera operator grips to stabilize the camera and support most of its weight. At the shoulder, the rest is curved and padded in order to rest comfortably on the camera operator's shoulder. In spite of claims to the contrary, when a camera is mounted on one of the rests, it is not positioned so that the camera operator can comfortably look into the viewfinder. While shifting some of the camera's weight to the operator's shoulder may be of assistance, the entire unit is unstable to tilting, i.e., the camera can be easily tilted causing extreme instability in the resulting video footage.
A portable camera assembly having a shoulder rest, a hand grip and a camera mount is also disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,963,904 to Lee. A gun stock camera rest, is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 2,806,416 to Jones. A support for photographic cameras with shoulder straps, a belt and various support and cross bars is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 2,552,205 to Moss. However, these devices all have the disadvantages of the Camcorder Shoulder Rest, discussed above.
Monopods have also been used in the past, and can provide some stability when grasped about 12" below the body of the camera. One such monopod is disclosed in the Jones patent, cited above. Nonetheless, the stability obtained with monopods is still not acceptable.
Various other types of shoulder harnesses for supporting cameras have been proposed in the prior art, but none provide a stable, inexpensive and versatile solution to supporting a portable video camera. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 2,746,369 to Beard et al., discloses a shoulder camera mount with pistol grips for supporting telephoto and long focus lenses. The patent discloses, for example, that the weight of the "camera gun" is so distributed that the center of gravity thereof at elevated positions is substantially disposed to fall along a line through the shoulders and torso of the operator. However, it is clear that at normal elevations, or at angles below the horizontal, a great deal of the weight of a telephoto lens for example, would be placed in the hands of a user, causing eventual fatigue. No means for adjusting the center of gravity of the assembly, for example, is provided.
A camera support is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 3,332,593 to Fauser, in which "body-engaging tubular members" and "body-engaging" rollers attach the support to the body. Similar shoulder harness supports are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,073,788 to Lingwall, U.S. Pat. No. 4,526,308 to Dovey, U.S. Pat. No. 2,873,645 to Horton, and U.S. Pat. No. 2,636,822 to Anderson. These devices have, among others, the disadvantage of being unable to move independently of the body of the operator.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,945,428 to Dearborn discloses a camera stabilizer with a tubular frame, a camera mounting portion and balancing masses disposed on opposite sides of the apparatus. However, the frame is specifically intended not to be rested on the shoulders of the operator. The entire weight is supported by the users arms, or, in other disclosed embodiments, a combination of the users arms and a monopod or belt harness, so that use of this device would lead to unnecessary fatigue.
It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a frame for stably supporting a portable video camera which is inexpensive, relatively light, and easy to use. It is a further object of the present invention to provide a frame for a video camera which is extremely stable and maneuverable, and which does not cause fatigue in the operator.
Another object of the present invention is to provide a frame for mounting a video or other type of camera which is extremely stable and maneuverable, and transfers the weight of the camera and associated mounting hardware to the operator's shoulders. This transfer removes the need for the operator to exert any force on the controlling handles that would otherwise be required to support the camera. Accordingly, the only forces necessary for the operator to apply are those required to move the camera and its hardware mounting assembly in azimuth and elevation to follow moving objects. Much of the azimuth change necessary is provided by moving the operator's trunk, or twisting the torso. Greater azimuth movements can be obtained by changing the position of the operator's feet. The result is that the camera securely rests on a stable platform, the operator's shoulders, and the operator can move the assembly with forces that are greatly reduced compared to those required if weight-support forces were superimposed on the forces necessary to move the camera. The fact that the operator is not providing any weight support with the hands and arms greatly reduces fatigue. The result is that the operator is able to obtain much higher quality images with greatly reduced spurious motion, and can operate the camera for extended periods without degradation of the quality of the images that would result from fatigue.